I find it shocking and a insult from JK Rowling, to tell us after all this time, Whats next Harry is bi-sexual.
You wrote some great books JK, thanks but leave it as it is.
What do you think?
2007-11-02
09:44:53
·
11 answers
·
asked by
cavetroy
3
in
Arts & Humanities
➔ Books & Authors
Sorry folks, i am not anti gay or anything. Its just I really don't think Jk should be allowed to add "ooh by the way"......
2007-11-02
10:31:39 ·
update #1
scoop...Whatever
Talk shite!
2007-11-02
11:11:29 ·
update #2
I agree wholeheartedly with you.
J. K. Rowling didn't care about the actors who played Dumbledore nor her fans when she made her announcement. It was all about her and her personal agenda.
Because the spotlight on the HP series had dimmed, she had to brighten it to push her own agenda. She did this by announcing that Dumbledore is gay.
Now once every one started talking again about Harry Potter, she recently announced that she will be auctioning off her own "personal" book called "The Beetle and the Bard" for charity.
That's the real reason she outed Dumbledore--to push her own agenda. The hypocritical git.
It is truly amazing how one is considered anti-gay because you don't agree with the lifestyle. But a gay person is never considered anti-heterosexual because they don't agree with our lifestyles.
Now what's wrong with this picture?
2007-11-02 23:40:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think people are getting a bit hysterical about this Dumbledore is Gay business. I didn't read the interview, so I don't know exactly what she said, but it was my impression she just said he loved Gellert Grindelwald.
Given that these two characters met when they were in their mid teens, when a lot of people go through phases of having crushes on both males and females, I don't see that this necessarily implies he was gay. There are a lot of different forms of love - the love of a good friend for instance. Just because he greatly admired and perhaps had a crush on Grindelwald, doesn't mean that he necessarily wanted to go to bed with him.
And anyway, what does it matter ? It's only a book, it's not real.
2007-11-02 11:48:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Why does it bother you so much? Richard Harris, the original and best wouldn't have had a choice because she didn't reveal it during filming.
Many straight actors have played gay parts before, if the money is right some of them will do just about anything.
2007-11-02 10:04:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by Smoochy Poochy 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
--RIP Richard Harris - the one and only Albus Dumbledore--
I found it shocking when JKR announced it, but it was definitely not an insult! I think its great that one of the main characters and arguably the most respected character in the series is gay as it sets a fantastic example to young people that read and love the HP books!
I think that Richard Harris would have played Dumbledore even if he knew of his sexuality because in mine, and many others' opinions, it is not a problem.
2007-11-02 09:58:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Why would he have a problem with it? Regardless of his orientation, Dumbledore was a nice character who was a good role model for the children in his care.
And of course he is and remains a fictional character, so I don't understand why you are getting your knickers in such a knot over this.
2007-11-02 11:51:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by Orla C 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
it's fiction so i don't think he really would have cared! i don't very much! it's not going to change my view on anything Harry Potter!! do u lke the new Dumbledore, Michael Gambon? i sure don't!!!
2007-11-02 09:53:32
·
answer #6
·
answered by I Support Cedric Diggory♥ 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's not like he had to "perform" for the occasion!
What a sheltered existence you have led.
I believe i have read he tended to lean towards that persuasion anyway.
2007-11-02 09:57:00
·
answer #7
·
answered by bambam 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
It's fiction...she's the author.. it's her intellectual property... she can change any or all of it at her whim. If you don't like it you can choose to ignore it, boycott it, or burn it.
2007-11-02 09:49:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
saying "i'm not anti-gay [but...]"
usually means your anti-gay.
edit...i'm just stating the obvious. re-read your question and think about someone who is gay or bi (like me) reading it and what they might think.
2007-11-02 11:00:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by scoop 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
i dont think he would have cared
its only a charector
Natalie x
2007-11-02 09:48:31
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋